This blog used to be called EDL Extra. I was a supporter (neither a member nor a leader) of the EDL until 2012. This blog has retained the old web address.****************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************

Tuesday, 12 April 2011

Salma Yaqoob defends the 'right' to wear that symbol of Islamism - the burqa

[Left: Salma Yaqoob on the phone, and on the bog, doing some deals with the SWP and Hamas. Top: what Yaqoob is fighting for - the Muslimah's masochistic 'right' to subjugate herself for Islamism.]

The French ‘burqa ban’, which comes into force tomorrow, has sparked a lot of debate in this country, much of it completely uninformed by the opinions of the small number of women who wear it. [Who says that the anti-burqa position is ‘completely uniformed by the opinions of the small number of women who wear it’? We can accept, or know, that (some!) burqa wearers haven’t been forced to wear the burqa and still be against it. In addition, the notion of force is difficult. There is physical force and there is emotional force. In many cases, emotional force is indeed used on Muslim women to make them wear either then hijab or burqa. Clearly Yaqoob is not talking about emotional force here. Isn’t it strange. For many years Leftist feminists, some being exactly the same type who are now defending the Brown Exotic’s 'right to wear the burqa', told us that every single women in the pornography industry was ‘forced’ to work in that industry. Many weren’t forced. They also told us about how white women were being forced to wear short skirts, wear make-up, cook for their husbands, etc. Most of them weren’t forced.

But that didn’t matter because white sexism was wrong. Then all of a sudden, Leftist ‘feminists’ began to defend the Brown Exotic’s right to be a victim of sexism and control because it’s Brown Exotics who are doing it. And that’s OK. Even stoning for adultery and genital mutilation are fine; according to some Leftist and even feminist councillors and social workers. It's all part of ‘their culture’ which ‘we have no right to interfere with’. Yet these middle-class Leftists and feminists had been interfering with working-class culture, and the behaviour of working-class women, for decades. In any case, it’s not just as case of Muslim women being forced to wear the burqa. Whether or not they have given in to such enforcement, or, alternatively, they are masochists who like be dominated by Muslim men, that’s not the point. The burqa is a symbol of Islamism. It is a symbol of Muslim separation from the kuffar. It is a two-finger insult to the infidel. It is a way of stressing the believers’ utter difference from the unbeliever. That’s why we should be against the burqa, whether it's enforced or not. Have you ever wondered why nearly every burqa wearer is young - except for the immigrant ones? The majority of home-grown burqa-wearers are under 25. That is, they are young and therefore filled with the zealous extremism of Islamism (just as white and middle class first-year university students are filled with the zealous extremism of the SWP).]

I’ve already said, many times, that their decision to wear a niqab is not one I would make. But these women have a right to their own voice. [People don’t have absolute ‘rights’ or freedoms. Yaqoob knows that. Everyone knows that. People don’t have a right to say they would like to sleep with children (except some Muslims). They don’t have the right to say ‘there’s a bomb in the cinema’. They don’t have the right or freedom to take crack or heroin. In fact, no one ‘has a right’ to anything unless the state and the judiciary give them that right. What Yaqoob and many others actually mean is:

Muslim women should have the right to wear the burqa.

But, again, does the BNP have ‘a right’ to be racist? Do they have a right to insult Muslims? Yaqoob wouldn’t agree with these rights, would she?

So, as ever, she’s displaying that acute degree of hypocrisy which has always aflicted her. Jeremy Bentham once said that ‘talk of rights’ was ‘nonsense on stilts’. That didn’t mean that he was against rights as such. All he meant was that rights must be legally and institutionally created and defined. ]

A new report from the At Home in Europe project examines the views and experiences of 32 women in France who wear a full-face veil – and finds that the vast majority took the decision for themselves. [Yaqoob’s singing the same tune again! It doesn’t matter to the EDL if these female Muslim masochists have made the decision themselves. Similarly, if a person declares that he made the choice to slice off his own head, would we automatically respect that choice?]

Today’s Observer carries an interview with Kenza Drider, one of the women who now faces arrest for her decision to dress in this way. She is very clear that it is a personal choice: “There was no mosque involved, no pressure from anyone. It is not a religious constraint since it is not laid down in Islam or the Qur'an that I have to wear a full veil. It is my personal choice...I would never encourage others to do it just because I do. That is their choice. My daughters can do what they like. As I tell them, this is my choice, not theirs."[Choice is not the issue... again! When someone makes the decision to be an Islamoterrorist or to support Islamoterrorism, we are absolutely against it! More relevantly, when a Muslim woman makes the choice to become an Islamist, and therefore to wear the burqa, then the EDL is absolutely against it! Choice or no choice, it doesn’t matter.]

She is equally clear about the effect that this law will have in France. "When President Sarkozy said: 'The burqa is not welcome in France', the president, my president, opened the door for racism, aggression and attacks on Islam. This is an attempt to stigmatise Islam and it has created enormous racism and Islamophobia that wasn't there before."[Classic! Classic Muslim blackmail! That is, if you do this to Muslims - if you do anything to Muslims, then, by definition (by Yaqoob’s definition), it must be ‘racist’ or an ‘aggressive attack on Islam’. And, of course, it must also be a sign of ‘Islamophobia’ - isn’t everything, love? I am surprised that Yaqoob hasn’t come out with the other usual Islamist gambit here:

If you ban the burqa, there will be ‘reprisal attacks’ [Yaqoob’s own words] from Muslims. Do you ‘really think that we [Muslims] will let things like this happen to us’ [her own words again]?’]

Women like Kenza Drider can clearly speak for themselves.They should have the same right to choose how they dress. [Would that include wearing a Nazi uniform or even just a swastika t-shirt? Of course Yaqoob wouldn’t think the same about these ‘rights’. What about wearing fur? Perhaps Yaqoob is against that too. You see, Yaqoob, as always, is really talking about the rights of one class of people - Muslims. She is talking about the freedom and rights of one class of people - Muslims. Apart from Muslims, and perhaps a handful of Trots who've done exemplary work for Islam and Islamism, Yaqoob doesn’t really give a shit about anyone else; especially if they’re white and working class.]

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Everything said about the burqa is made clear in this video. At 11 seconds, not only is there a British Muslimah wearing the burqa, but her actual facial covering is covered with the writing from the Islamic Black Flag of War! And what war is that? The war against every infidel and against every infidel institution! Yet, here on the streets of London, we have the UAF/SWP, and one of its spokeswomen, Sabby Dhalu (in the video still below), defending the 'right' of these Muslims, not to wear the burqa, but the right to declare war on us! And that's why the SWP/UAF Trots support the Islamofascists - because they too are at war with most Brits and everything they hold dear. Yet I still cannot believe that these SWP retards are willing to commit suicide on behalf of Marxist and Trotkyist theory and also because of the blindingly silly belief that somehow they can turn these Islamists (even the ones in burqas) into Trots just like them. So that's why the EDL is against the burqa. Not because of 'racism', or Islamophobia, but because we don't want to die come the day we refuse to 'revert' to Islam. Never surrender to Islamofacism and its red-facists 'enablers' in the UAF/SWP!